Los Angeles or Waterboarding?
After 9/11, Americans wanted one thing from Washington: to prevent future terrorist attacks. President George W. Bush, the CIA and other hard-working officials delivered. For their trouble, a handful of those individuals now have reason to fear that they may be ruined.
My guess is that President Obama realizes it was a big mistake for his administration to release four memos written by Bush administration lawyers sanctioning enhanced interrogation techniques. Already, rage on the left has prompted Obama to go squishy on his once-insistent opposition to prosecuting any Bush administration officials. Now he says he might let his attorney general prosecute Bush lawyers.
That would be criminalizing the politics of 2002. George Tenet wrote in his book "At the Center of the Storm," "After 9/11, gripped by the same emotions and fears, Congress exhorted the intelligence community to take more risks to protect the country." Civil rights? Then-Sen. Bob Graham, D-Fla., noted at a 2002 Senate intelligence committee that "we are not living in times in which lawyers can say no to an operation just to play it safe." Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz defended the use of rough treatment — "the third degree" — in order "to elicit information from terrorists about continuing threats." The Bush administration authorized techniques that the ACLU calls torture.
Seven years later, Obama banned those techniques, as he promised. But in releasing the memos last week, Obama unwittingly reinforced Osama bin Laden's view of America as a country of pantywaists. Now America's enemies know they have nothing to fear but bad lawyering if U.S. forces catch them.
The memos describe "enhanced" techniques used on 28 high-value detainees. Protocol called for operatives to begin with tamer methods. To wit: the "attention grasp," the "facial slap" and "dietary manipulation — that is, "presenting detainees with a bland, unappetizing but nutritionally complete diet." Read: Ensure Plus. Really.
"Walling" involved pushing a detainee into a wall — but a phony wall to prevent injury. The CIA was going to try to scare al-Qaida biggie Abu Zubaydah with insects, but the bugs had to be harmless and not cause an allergic reaction. I can see the al-Qaida boys chortling in their cave over the very idea that these techniques would even be controversial — not to mention out of bounds under the Obama administration.
If the tamer methods did not work, operatives could ask CIA headquarters for permission to use more daunting techniques — such as sleep deprivation and waterboarding. Three detainees were waterboarded before the last waterboarding in March 2003. The memos revealed that two detainees — Abu Zubaydah and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (aka KSM) — were water boarded a total of 266 times.
Some maintain that the CIA might have learned what it needed to know without waterboarding. But as one memo reported, before the questioning got tough, "KSM resisted giving any answers to questions about future attacks, simply noting, 'Soon you will know.'"
The questioning got tougher. As the memo noted, the CIA believes that "the intelligence acquired from these interrogations has been a key reason why al Qaeda has failed to launch a spectacular attack in the West since 11 September 2001."
And: Once "enhanced techniques" were used on KSM, interrogations "led to the discovery of a KSM plot, the 'Second Wave,' … to use East Asian operatives to crash a hijacked airliner' into a building in Los Angeles."
Do I like waterboarding? No, but it is not life threatening; in extreme cases, I can live with it. And I'll take waterboarding over a 9/11 in Los Angeles any day.
One last point: The Navy has used waterboarding in training. Obama put a stop to the "enhanced" techniques because he believes they have tarnished America's image abroad, which makes Americans less safe. People of goodwill can disagree on that point.
But when Obama opened the door for his attorney general to prosecute Bush lawyers, that flip-flop told U.S. intelligence and law enforcement operatives that Obama's assurances cannot be trusted. That can't be good for America's safety.
Former California Gov. Pete Wilson, who served on the Bush Defense Policy Board, was appalled. "If they try to prosecute that, that should spark mass resignations in the government," he told me Tuesday.
As for Obama, Wilson said, "This is a guy who was teaching law. Good God."
E-mail Debra J. Saunders at dsaunders@sfchronicle.com. To find out more about Debra J. Saunders, and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate Web page at www.creators.com.
COPYRIGHT 2009 CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC.

|
 |
Comments
|
8 Comments | Post Comment
|
|
Boy, if I had realized we didn't have to wait for an earthquake for California to break off and fall into the sea in order to get rid of Los Angeles, I would have personally stopped the CIA interrogations!!
Not really. But if you told me there was a plot to take out the entire 0bama Administration leadership, I wouldn't blame the CIA if they "forgot" to notify the White House in time to prevent it, after the way Barry has been treating them this past week.
When I played football in high school, during practice one of the "prima donna" star running backs was constantly complain about the line blocking (or, in his opinion, lack of it). After a couple of plays in which we linemen really, truly didn't block for him, and he got his butt kicked in by the defense, he learned the true value of his blockers, kept his mouth shut, and we all went about our business.
0bama and his lefty crew really don't know the true value of the CIA. If they did, they would not be playing these political games with the safety of the country.
Comment: #1
Posted by: Nick_in_Virginia
Thu Apr 23, 2009 2:54 AM
|
|
|
|
"Obama realizes it was a big mistake"? Why would you make THAT assumption? He's a FAR LEFTIST. He's been one all his life. This is what they do. Gotta get peoples' ATTENTION offa him, and his SOCIALISM. Nothing a little 3rd World SHOW TRIAL can't handle. You see, the object, is to keep the 'base' foaming at the mouth. Keep them MAD. What better way, than a SHOW TRIAL about TORTURE? That's GOTTA be better than folks concentrating on his Administration NATIONALIZING the Auto Industry, and taking OWNERSHIP, of the Countries' LARGEST BANKS. "Yeah, but those Interrorgation techniques, kept America SAFE." Since when do the Democrats care if we're safe? "Better RED Than DEAD", as I recall. The 'GREAT UNITER' is playing a DANGEROUS GAME. He's ripping a gulf, between RIGHT and LEFT, that can only lead to violence. We are becoming VENEZUALA. And that won't stand. Mark My Words.
Comment: #2
Posted by: Timothy L. Pennell
Thu Apr 23, 2009 6:31 AM
|
|
|
|
Ma,am;... Can you imagine the lesson the world would have taken from WWII if the allies had not stretched a few criminal necks after it had ended???Hitler took the lesson from the Armenian Genocide the the World did not care... The reason we were open to attack was the failure of the CIA and FBI on basic matters of security, and also because of our willingness as a country to win at all costs... After that choice it is a small moral issue to torture...But think of how you feel when you hear of a woman raped and tortured??? Does it not get your back up???So how does some one make friends with you, after they torture your friends, or some one very like you??? If anyone believes it is essential to torture to save great numbers; let them torture freely... But then, let them make the argument before a jury....I have only saved one life, in my life... The guy did something stupid, and I had to dive in, and help him out...But it came very close to killing me... And only justly so; because if the moral act had not some danger associated with it, it would hardly have been heroic... So what is the danger to torture??? If it is worth doing, and some good attaches to it, then shine a light on it, and take the credit... In fact; everyone knows torture is a criminal in inhuman act that can only be hypothetically justified... Why not justify every torture before the fact??? Instead; Why give blanket immunity for a crime which will find us all guilty, and make us all targets??? If you think, on reasonable grounds that your torture of a human being will save a great number of lives, is that not worth the risk of your own life???In fact; reason has nothing to do with it... We torture to spread terror... The more we inspire our enemy to fight to the death, to strap on suicide vests, and kill self and numbers, the more an eternal war can be justified... The truth is that our conflict with Islam is unjustified... They very much want us to fear them because it is the only weapon they have...They must rely upon the west for nearly every weapon they have now...You see the price these people are willing to endure to have a credible arsonal...They are poor people, and every weapon they buy makes them poorer... In fact; they are are the ones living with terror, so they want to export it and share it... But for our part, torture only adds to the problem, that we cannot go in one day from torture to talk... Much as we want to say the enemy is unreasonable, it is ourselves, and our leaders who are unreasonable...Try the issue in a court, if you think you have right on your side...In doing so you would find that there are no imaginary cases...Bring the facts and lay them before a jury, and you will find that people torture because they are criminals who find pleasure in the pain of others... Those people are our enemies, and the enemies of all humanity.... Thanks...Sweeney
Comment: #3
Posted by: James A, Sweeney
Thu Apr 23, 2009 7:04 AM
|
|
|
|
If Leftists were really concerned about law breaking, why aren't they screeching about all the "ILLEGALS" crossing our borders!? Next time one of these sanctimonious bleeding hearts rants about waterboarding and illegality, ask them why they're falling all over themselves in support border crossings. Call them on their hypocrisy. This is nothing more than a political witchhunt and the American people will be the ones to suffer.
Comment: #4
Posted by: Kelly_In_La
Thu Apr 23, 2009 8:15 AM
|
|
|
|
Obama's goal is to weaken our defense against the march of jihad
Comment: #5
Posted by: francis
Thu Apr 23, 2009 9:14 AM
|
|
|
|
Re: Kelly_In_La;....What you justify for them; you justify for yourself... And who cares if it has already been tried on our people, and some one, or no one was hanged for it... Next time an innoncent American falls into their hands, you shout real loud that there is no such thing as an innocent American, and that we all support torture, because we can do it...Maybe some poor shet hasn't got any guns or gunmen standing with him... Maybe all he has got is the respect others hold for us, and a few feet of moral high ground... Maybe you never went anywhere and don't ever care to, so that guy is on his own.... But I promise you this: If you support torture, all you get for your trouble is dirt all over you and a bad smell... You don't do anything for us or get us one step closer to peace... All you do is make the situation worse, fully expecting that chance alone will protect you... And that is the rotten thing about fortune, that it condemns the innocent and frees the guilty...Thanks...Sweeney
Comment: #6
Posted by: James A, Sweeney
Thu Apr 23, 2009 8:50 PM
|
|
|
|
Re: francis;...Our goal, and Mr. Obama's goal has nothing to do with defense, and everything to do with offense...If we were a democracy, then defense would be natural, since democracies are good for little else but defense...But Capitalism needs resources and markets and if they lay if distant lands; then too bad for them... Mr. Bush was correct to say democracies do not attack their neighbors...That leaves us out, but it was a true statement... Democracies do not attack, but defend what they have, never going out of their way to take other peoples stuff, or to rile them up...We fight an offensive war, because capital demands it...And look where those people attacked... The pentagon and the World Trade Center... Sure; it was symbolic...It did us no lasting damage, but if we could not take a lesson from it they will teach us another, and another, and another... We will not defeat Islam like we have defeated Christianity...Only by not fighting them can we win...Thanks...Sweeney
Comment: #7
Posted by: James A, Sweeney
Thu Apr 23, 2009 9:02 PM
|
|
|
|
Just reading some of these comments brings to mind the fact that we are making heroes of the sailors on the ship in Somalia. What's that all about? I remember my father-in-law talking about what he went through while stationed in the Phillipines during WWII on a daily basis,,,,and we are making heroes of the sailors just by their mere presence on a ship that was hijacked? Also, another thing of note, one of the sailors, apparently stayed in minute to minute contact with his parents about the entire episide. I remember my grandmother telling me that she didn't know if her son (my uncle) was alive or dead for 2 years while fighting in WWII in France because she didn't hear from him. He eventually did come home, and so did my father-in-law, to a well-deserved heroe's welcome. Times were tough back then. War was awful. But we survived, thanks to those doughboys who put their lives on the line, not annually, weekly or monthly, but daily and hourly.
Comment: #8
Posted by: Kathie Rushing
Fri Apr 24, 2009 2:03 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Author’s Podcast
|